The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Recurrent Clostridium Difficile Disease: Epidemiology and Clinical Characteristics
Abstract
Objective: To describe the epidemiology, diagnosis, risk factors, patient impact, and treatment strategies for recurrent Clostridium difficile-associated disease (CDAD). Design: Data were collected as part of a blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial testing a new combination treatment for recurrent CDAD. Retrospective data regarding prior CDAD episodes were collected from interviews and medical-chart review. Prospective data on the current CDAD episode, risk factors, and recurrence rates were collected during a 2-month follow-up. Settings: National referral study. Participants: Patients with recurrent CDAD. Interventions: Treatment with a 10-day course of low-dose (500 mg/d) or high-dose (2 g/d) vancomycin or metronidazole (1 g/d). Results: Recurrent CDAD was found to have a lengthy course involving multiple episodes of diarrhea, abdominal cramping, nausea, and fever. CDAD may recur over several years despite frequent treatment with antibiotics. Recurrence rates were similar regardless of the choice or dose of antibiotic. Recurrent CDAD is not a trivial disease: patients may have multiple episodes (as many as 14), may require hospitalization, and the mean lifetime cost of direct medical care was $10,970 per patient. Fortunately, the disease does not become progressively more severe as the number of episodes increase. Two risk factors predictive for recurrent CDAD were found: increasing age and a decreased quality-of-life score at enrollment. Conclusions: Recurrent CDAD is a persistent disease that may result in prolonged hospital stays, additional medical costs, and rare serious complications.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
McDonald, L. C., Gerding, D. N., Johnson, S., Bakken, J. S., Carroll, K. C., Coffin, S. E., Dubberke, E. R., Garey, K. W., Gould, C. V., Kelly, C., et al. (2018) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/cix1085 · Cited by 2,690
Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of Clostridium difficile infections
Surawicz, C. M., Brandt, L. J., Binion, D. G., Ananthakrishnan, A. N., Curry, S. R., Gilligan, P. H., McFarland, L. V., Mellow, M., & Zuckerbraun, B. S. (2013) · American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1038/ajg.2013.4 · Cited by 1,645
McFarland, L. V. (2006) · The American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00465.x · Cited by 872
Self-citationKyne, L., Warny, M., Qamar, A., & Kelly, C. P. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03592-3 · Cited by 804
van Prehn, J., Reigadas, E., Vogelzang, E. H., Bouza, E., Hristea, A., Guery, B., Krutova, M., Norén, T., Allerberger, F., Coia, J. E., et al. (2021) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2021.09.038 · Cited by 640
Metadata
- Authors
- McFarland, L. V., Surawicz, C. M., Rubin, M., Fekety, R., Elmer, G. W., & Greenberg, R. N.
- Venue
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1999-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 01
- Pages
- 43-50
- ISSN
- 0899-823X (ISSN-L)
- 1559-6834
- OpenAlex
- W2130150046
- Cited by
- 353
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Recurrent Clostridium Difficile Disease: Epidemiology and Clinical Characteristics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/501553
- The paper
- McFarland, L. V., Surawicz, C. M., Rubin, M., Fekety, R., Elmer, G. W., & Greenberg, R. N. (1999). Recurrent Clostridium Difficile Disease: Epidemiology and Clinical Characteristics. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1086/501553
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.